HomeMy WebLinkAboutMS-02-05 - Decision - 0006 0008 Tanglewood Drive#MS-02-05
STATE OF VERMONT
COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
RE: APPLICATION OF RONALD & SHEILA KINGSBURY
This matter came before the South Burlington Development Review Board
pursuant to Section 25.118 ( c ) of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations on
application of Ronald & Sheila Kingsbury, hereinafter "Applicants" seeking
permission to allow a 1 1/2 story 12' x 20' accessory structure to encroach ten
(10) feet beyond the 15 foot rear yard setback limitation. The applicants were
present at the public hearing held on July 2, 2002 relative to this appeal. Based
on evidence submitted at the hearing and as part of the file, the South
Burlington Development Review Board hereby renders the following decision on
this application:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The owners of record of this particular property are Ronald & Sheila
Kingsbury.
2. The principal use of the property is a two (2) family dwelling.
3. The accessory structure which is the subject of this application has been
constructed without a zoning permit. A survey plat submitted by the
applicant prepared by James Harvell indicates that the structure is five (5)
feet from the rear property line.
4. This project consists of a request for permission to allow a 1 1/2 story 12' x
20' accessory structure to encroach ten (10) feet beyond the 15 foot rear
yard setback limitation. Staff discovered that the structure was built
without a permit and placed the owners in violation.
5. This property located at 6 and 8 Tanglewood Drive lies within the R4
District. It is bounded on north and east by single-family residences, on
the south by a duplex, and on the west by Tanglewood Drive.
6. Section 25.118 ( c ) of the zoning regulations reads in part:
'Encroachment of a structure into a required setback beyond the
limitation set fourth in (a) and (b) above may be approved by the DRB
subject to the provisions of Section 26.05, but in no event shall a
structure be less than three (3) feet from a side or rear property line....
The Board shall determine that the proposed encroachment will not have
an undue adverse affect on:
i. Views of adjoining and / or nearby properties;
ii. Access to sunlight of adjoining and / or nearby properties;
iii. Adequate on -site parking; and
iv. Safety of adjoining and / or nearby property."
7. Letters of support for the application were submitted by the following:
a. Jacquelyn V. Swan, 5 Tanglewood Drive
b. Michael Robbins, 25 Tanglewood Drive
c. G.L. Perreault, 252 Laurel Hill Drive
d. Michael & Stephanie Barrett, 12 Tanglewood Drive
e. Arlene Gilligan, 2-4 Tanglewood Drive
f. Wylene W. Jackson, 4 Tanglewood Drive
g. John & Wanda Ryan, 2 Tanglewood Drive
8. A letter dated June 24, 2002 from Margo Wood Kingsley at 248 Laurel Hill
Drive was submitted. Mrs. Kingsley indicated her opposition to the
request. She stated her opposition due to the proximity of the structure
to some large trees and the adverse affect this might have on her ability
to sell her home. Ms. Kingsley's property is located five (5) feet from the
structure which is the subject of this application.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Section 25.118 ( c) ( i ) of the zoning regulations requires that the
proposed encroachment will not have an undue adverse affect on views of
adjoining and / or nearby properties. The close proximity of the proposed
structure to the adjoining property will have an undue adverse affect on
the views of the property at 248 Laurel Hill Drive. The Board therefore
concludes that the requirements of Section 25.118 ( c) ( i ) are not being
met.
2. Section 25.118 ( c) ( ii ) of the zoning regulations requires that the
proposed encroachment will not have an undue adverse affect on access
to sunlight of adjoining and / or nearby properties. The close proximity of
the proposed structure will have an undue adverse affect on access to
sunlight to two (2) large trees on the property located at 248 Laurel Hill
Drive. The Board therefore concludes that the requirements of Section
25.118 ( c ) ( ii ) of the zoning regulations are not being met.
DECISION
Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the South
Burlington Development Review Board hereby denies the project of Ronald &
Sheila Kingsbury permission to allow a 1 1/2 story 12' x 20' accessory structure to
encroach ten (10) feet beyond the 15 foot rear yard setback limitation at 6 and 8
Tanglewood Drive for the following reasons:
1. Section 25.118 ( c ) ( i) of the zoning regulations is not being met.
2. Section 25.118 ( c ) ( ii) of the zoning regulations is not being met.
Dated this Z& day of July, 2002, at South Burlington, Vermont
Chair or Clerk-A-LL'13'=�
South Burlington D elopment Review rd
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont
Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30
days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $150.00. If you fail to appeal
this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may be
lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to
24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality).